Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

RMS Accused Of Attempting Glibc Hostile Takeover

Posted by CmdrTaco on Sun Aug 19, 2001 05:39 PM
from the things-are-never-dull dept.
Bram Stolk sent a bit in thats been floating around lately where Ulrich Drepper, glibc maintainer announces the new version, and sidetracks to discuss an an RMS takeover attempt and how he feels about it. He raises several good points and I tend to agree with him. The FSF has done, and continues to do so much good, but more and more tension continues to grow between the extreme free speech faction and the more moderate folks. People have asked my opinion, and I'll just leave it by saying I don't prefix "Linux" with those 3 little letters and a slash even tho I've been asked.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) | 2
  • Thought Police by Stickerboy (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @05:43PM
    • Re:Thought Police (Score:4, Funny)

      by ChaosDiscord (4913) on Sunday August 19 2001, @05:55PM (#2195115) Homepage Journal

      Freedom of speech includes the freedom to complain loudly about other's speech. Freedom of speech includes the freedom to be as anal and vitrolic as you want. So what's the problem?

      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Thought Police by cloudmaster (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:04PM
        • Re:Thought Police by cloudmaster (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:11PM
        • Re:Thought Police (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Chops (168851) on Sunday August 19 2001, @06:43PM (#2195288)
          This common misunderstanding is part of why RMS is so adamant about "GNU/Linux." A modern Linux system uses the GNU project's system libraries, compiler toolchain, and (mostly) command-line Unix tools (tar, gzip, etc.) Without any one of these, Linux couldn't function as a modern Free OS -- they're not "trivial" add-ons like Perl or Apache.

          I personally say "Linux," probably because I'm afraid of looking silly. It is true, though, that there's more GNU code on your machine than Linux (i.e. kernel) code, and it's just as necessary to get your bash prompt to come up. Some people say it's "more necessary" (since GNU has a kinda-sorta-almost-working kernel, but AFAIK gcc and glibc have no existing Free replacements), but that just starts flamewars.
          [ Parent ]
        • Re:Thought Police (Score:5, Insightful)

          by ChaosDiscord (4913) on Sunday August 19 2001, @06:57PM (#2195334) Homepage Journal

          I use some Gnu tools and many more non-gnu-licensed tools with my linux kernels. I'm not gonna say Gnu/Apache/Perl/BSD/etc/Linux, and neither should anyone else. Yeah, the system would be less useful without gnu tools, it'd also not be what it is without all the other pieces of software on it.

          The point isn't that the GNU tools are a major part of a standard Linux distribution.

          In the early 1990s, the GNU project had everything you needed for a baseline operating system. Compiler, assembler, linker, C library, shell. Everything except a kernel. Linus took those tools and added the final piece, the kernel. Linus didn't need X-Windows or Perl. Apache didn't exist. Linus needed a compiler, a linker, an assembler, a C library, and a shell. He used the GNU project's tools. Linux is built upon a foundation of GNU tools.

          That's why the Stallman can claim the GNU project has a valid claim to share the Linux title. Why bother? Politics. Stallman is pushing a political and ethical agenda. Free Software or nothing. Part of his job is to spread the word, and getting the GNU name used is a great way to do it. Every user who says "What's the GNU thing in front of Linux?" is an opportunity to spread the word.

          That said, I'm not sure I agree that it should be called GNU/Linux. It seems a bit pushy to me. But don't make the mistake that he wants it called GNU/Linux just because the GNU tools are part of the typical package. He wants it added to help spread the Free Software word. His claim is that the GNU tools where the foundation.

          [ Parent ]
          • Re:Thought Police by Second_Derivative (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @07:08PM
          • Re:Thought Police by crimoid (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @07:51PM
          • Re:Thought Police by Telek (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @08:27PM
          • Re:Thought Police by goodtim (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @08:46PM
            • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
          • Re:Thought Police by bwt (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @09:01PM
            • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
          • Re:Thought Police (Score:5, Interesting)

            by Arandir (19206) on Sunday August 19 2001, @09:39PM (#2195764) Homepage Journal
            But Linus Torvalds did not take an existing unfinished GNU operating system and merely add the missing piece. Yes, GNU could have taken the Linux kernel and completed its OS, but they did not. And it's not what Linus did.

            The real, unrevised, history is very different. Linus started with the goal of creating a complete operating system. Once he got the kernel and a few bits of infrastructure done, he and his collaborators chose to use off-the-shelf parts already available to complete it. Some of those parts were from GNU, but many others from elsewhere. And many of the crucial components were written *specifically* for Linux.

            To use an analogy, imagine that RMS set out to create an automobile. He was all finished except for the engine. Now Linus comes along and builds an engine. He goes and grabs a drive train and chassis from GNU Autoparts Store, and an electrical system from BSD. He and many friends contribute to the miscellaneous components. Voila! It's an ugly car, but it works.

            GNU does not get to name this automobile. They did not build it. They only supplied some critical parts.
            [ Parent ]
          • Re:Thought Police by Ratbert42 (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @10:08PM
          • Something doesn't ring true here by Tony Shepps (Score:3) Sunday August 19 2001, @10:49PM
          • Re:Thought Police by twilightzero (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @11:27PM
          • Re:Thought Police by HongPong (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @02:31AM
          • Re:Thought Police by Bazman (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @05:26AM
          • Re:Thought Police by Frodo (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @05:39AM
          • Re:Thought Police by jejones (Score:1) Monday August 20 2001, @07:02AM
          • Re:Thought Police by oconnorcjo (Score:3) Monday August 20 2001, @08:24AM
          • Re: Acronyms by cicadia (Score:1) Monday August 20 2001, @02:25AM
          • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
        • Re:Thought Police by nathanh (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @05:34AM
      • Re:Thought Police by randombit (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:08PM
      • Re:Thought Police by Nater (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:34PM
      • Re:Thought Police by Chagrin (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @07:17PM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:Thought Police by Weh (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @07:41PM
      • Re:Thought Police by mr_death (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @08:34PM
      • Re:Thought Police by CaptWidget (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @09:13PM
      • Re:Thought Police by Duckie01 (Score:1) Monday August 20 2001, @07:20AM
    • Re:Thought Police by Adam Jenkins (Score:3) Sunday August 19 2001, @05:56PM
    • Re:Thought Police (Score:5, Funny)

      by Amon Re (102766) on Sunday August 19 2001, @05:59PM (#2195123)
      I will probably be the only here to defend RMS, but I totally agree with Linux being called GNU/Linux when talking about an entire distribution instead of just the kernel. You are ignoring the work of a lot of developers by just calling it Linux. And I know people will say "We should call it Xfree86/BSD/GNU/Linux then." Well Xfree86 and a lot of the BSD code isn't needed at all to get an operating system up and running. GNU and Linux represent the core that is needed.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Thought Police (Score:5, Interesting)

        by brianvan (42539) on Sunday August 19 2001, @06:12PM (#2195166)
        The core that is needed to whom? YOU? What if I need Xfree86, BSD, and perhaps other commercial applications as part of my operating system? Then do I refer to all of them?

        I mean, surely when I tell people what OS I use, I say Windows 98, not Windows98/Office2000/Winamp/AOL/ATI Drivers/Creative Labs Drivers/Winzip/Acrobat Reader...

        I approve of different vendors calling their distributions whatever they want, based on Linux or not. Let Red Hat Linux simply be Red Hat... let them call it Red Hat Linux if they have a Red Hat Windows Compatible OS too. Maybe there's good reasons not to do that either, but I see no reason why Linux should be called GNU/Linux. GNU does not own Linux. And I would laugh if Linus sold the rights off to the kernel one day, as Stallman would be very very screwed...
        [ Parent ]
        • Re:Thought Police (Score:5, Insightful)

          Okay, lets set this straight once and for all.

          What is part of the operating system?

          - kernel
          - libraries necessary to run C programs
          - the most basic interface possible

          What is not part of the operating system?

          - GUI
          - web browser
          - office suite
          - your mom

          Okay... so, you should call linux "GNU/Linux", because GNU tools are a larger percentage of the Operating System itself than even the Linux kernel.

          You should not call windows "Windows98/Acrobat Reader" because Acrobat Reader in no way qualifies as a "part of the Operating System".
          [ Parent ]
          • Re:Thought Police by Nater (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:39PM
          • Re:Thought Police by IpalindromeI (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:41PM
          • Re:Thought Police by Your Login Here (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @07:16PM
            • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
          • Re:Thought Police by Your_Mom (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @08:41PM
          • Why define an OS that way? It's just dumb. The OS at its most basic form is a command interpreter of some sort, which can be just a kernel. Why specify that an OS must contain libraries that can run C programs? Don't people use languages other than C? And how about straight assembly? If someone writes something that functions as an OS, but it doesn't have C libraries and must be coded for by other means, it's still an OS. Or are we going to start arbitrarily defining things by what languages and libraries they use? Doesn't a piece of software serve the same function, whether it's written in C or Java or Python or whatever? Then stop defining an OS by a compiler or a library. If you want to see an OS at its most basic, just put an ancient DOS command.com on an empty drive, along with whatever text config files that version of DOS will require to load itself. Sure, DOS usually has other files for "external commands" and for access to upper memory, etc.,--but they aren't necessary to do the absolute basics.

            It's just stupid, and besides many people use OSes who wouldn't use a compiler and wouldn't know or care what libraries their software is linked to. An OS, like it or not, is defined by its kernel.

            Let me lather, rinse, and repeat: an OS is defined by its kernel. And here's where I prove it: If I run a Solaris box and install and link to a bunch of GNU stuff, does that magically transform my OS into GNU/Solaris? NO.

            This is why I think Stallman should be largely ignored now that he has already made his historic contribution of the GNU tools. He will go down in history for that accomplishment. But at the moment he's a hindrance, not a help. He has passed his prime, made his contribution, and is now being a petty bitch who squabbles about naming an OS he didn't write. He is actively trying to harm Linux, what with his devotion to the HURD. Anyone who doubts this, should read the post referenced in this story where the Linux glibc porter/maintainer states that Stallman tried to push him into working on glibc for Hurd instead of for Linux.

            It should be obvious that Linux is RMS's "bastard child"--it's the first OS born from the GNU tools, and it has made the Free Software movement what it is today as well as helping spawn Open Source. Without Linux, Free Software would still be a tiny little movemwent instead of being on so many desktops and servers. Yet Stallman doesn't care about Linux, he cares about finally building the kernel for his GNU/HURD dream and eventually putting Linux out to pasture. And that's fine. But don't be a schmuck and think Stallman cares about Linux or should be listened to about a damned thing that has to do with Linux. If it were up to him, all Linux developers would drop their work and start on the Hurd. Things like the attempted coup mentioned in this story just go to show that RMS is slowly sabotaging Linux, in order to promote his Hurd. And before marking this as flamebait, at least read the account linked in the story.
            [ Parent ]
          • Yes, and here's /why/ this is a good idea. by devphil (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @11:30PM
          • Re:Thought Police by miguel (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @11:41PM
          • Re:Thought Police (Score:4, Interesting)

            by Jboy_24 (88864) on Monday August 20 2001, @12:05AM (#2196178) Homepage
            Hmmm, lets look at my Dell machine that is running linux...

            Sony CDR,
            Intel processor
            Rambus memory
            IBM harddrive
            Sony monitor
            Dell motherboard

            You can't very well run a computer without a processor, memory or a harddrive? What arogance of Micheal Dell to call his computers just 'Dell' when he depends on other company's to create THE MOST ecential(sp?) parts of his computers? Shouldn't he give credit to Sony for the CDR and monitor by calling the computer the SonyDell XPS 830? Why Sony even makes a competing product, should they be pissed that Dell just came and USED their CDR and monitor without making his own to sell? What about Intel? A processor 'defines' the computer as to what it can or can't run. I won't be looking at OS/X now that I've got an Intel processor, so shouldn't my comptuer be called a InDell XPS 830?

            Of cousre not, Dell gets to name it Dell because they packaged up the off the shelf parts and put them together and most inportant, they TAKE RESPONSIBLITY for it working. If linux was a POS then RMS would proabaly SUE Linus for naming his OS GNU/Linux. Linux is named linux be cause you look to Linus, the kenrel developers and the distributers of LINUX to insure that Linux works as an operating system. RMS takes NO responsibility that GNU stuff will work with any new version of the kernel, therefore he gets no mention except as Dell might mention Sony. As a feature of the Computer. Not as the computer itself.

            [ Parent ]
          • Re:Thought Police by krogoth (Score:1) Monday August 20 2001, @02:36AM
          • Re:Thought Police by aardcore (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @03:23AM
          • Re:Thought Police by Nickoty (Score:1) Monday August 20 2001, @04:31AM
          • Re:Thought Police by No Tears In The End (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @04:49AM
          • Re:Thought Police by Frodo (Score:1) Monday August 20 2001, @05:35AM
            • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
          • Re:Thought Police by bero-rh (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @05:57AM
          • Re:Thought Police by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @08:44AM
          • Re:Thought Police by raynet (Score:1) Monday August 20 2001, @11:11AM
          • Re:Thought Police by jmccay (Score:1) Monday August 20 2001, @11:43AM
          • Re:Thought Police by raindrop#1 (Score:1) Monday August 20 2001, @01:56PM
          • Re:Thought Police by Cyno (Score:1) Monday August 20 2001, @02:22PM
          • Re:Thought Police by Arandir (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @02:41PM
          • Re:Thought Police by Shadowlore (Score:1) Monday August 20 2001, @04:42PM
          • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
        • Re:Thought Police by Amon Re (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:27PM
        • Re:Thought Police by (void*) (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:31PM
        • Re:Thought Police by shokk (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @08:20PM
        • Re:Thought Police by Oestergaard (Score:3) Monday August 20 2001, @12:45AM
        • Re:Thought Police by twitter (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @08:54AM
        • Re:Thought Police by Cyno (Score:1) Monday August 20 2001, @02:27PM
        • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:Thought Police by Anthony Boyd (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:22PM
      • Re:Thought Police by eXtro (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:22PM
      • Re:Thought Police (Score:5, Insightful)

        by p3d0 (42270) on Sunday August 19 2001, @06:28PM (#2195238)
        I have an idea. GNU/Linux is a bit of a mouthful, so let's use an abbreviation. I recommend "Linux".
        [ Parent ]
      • Re:Thought Police by Alan (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:42PM
      • Distribution names by mogdax (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:48PM
      • Re:Thought Police by ttyRazor (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:51PM
      • Re:Thought Police by Syberghost (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @07:35PM
      • Re:Thought Police by marcovje (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @07:44PM
      • Re:Thought Police by Eil (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @07:51PM
      • Re:Thought Police (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Telek (410366) <da99@home . c om> on Sunday August 19 2001, @08:35PM (#2195607) Homepage
        When I say that I run Linux, I am not saying "Hey, I run this great os written by one guy called Linus Torvalds". I'm saying that I run a free os that is developed by many many many people in total. Adding the GNU/ to the front of the name does nothing towards additional recognation of anyone's work. You don't mention the hardware that it was developed on, the people's names or anything else when talking about the name of your OS. Linux has become an ideal, a namesake, a beacon. It doesn't matter that little billy bob just released his version of SlippyNix 2.0, it's all part of the same cause, the same ideal. A name is not what we're fighting for here guys, it's the thought behind it. Free software (as in beer AND speech) has got to be about more than bickering and fussing about who gets to lay claim to what. We're not about laying claim guys, we're about free speech, free beer, and free ideals, or at least that's what everyone keeps professing and bitching about here.

        Let's choose our real battles, everyone here, and RMS too... What's more important? GNU/Linux or Skylarov and DMCA and DeCSS and tyrany?

        That question I leave up to you to decide.

        {soap box mode: off}
        [ Parent ]
      • Re:Thought Police by SuperBug (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @09:34PM
      • Re:Thought Police by fgp (Score:1) Monday August 20 2001, @12:52AM
      • Re:Thought Police by bero-rh (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @05:54AM
      • Re:Thought Police by BasharTeg (Score:1) Monday August 20 2001, @09:24AM
      • Re:Thought Police by HiThere (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @12:32PM
      • Re:Thought Police by Bongzilla (Score:1) Monday August 20 2001, @01:02PM
      • Re:Thought Police by codeforprofit2 (Score:1) Tuesday August 21 2001, @04:14AM
      • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Thought Police by (void*) (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:06PM
    • Re:Thought Police by blonde rser (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:08PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Thought Police by Agrivane (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:09PM
    • Re:Thought Police....NOT that Simple by darkPHi3er (Score:3) Sunday August 19 2001, @07:58PM
    • Re:Thought Police by Oestergaard (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @12:40AM
    • Re:Thought Police by njdj (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @03:03AM
    • Linus Completed, RMS did not by Zeinfeld (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @10:59AM
    • 4 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • strong words by mz001b (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @05:47PM
    • Re:strong words by mz001b (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @09:00PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Hurd vs Linux by slashdot_commentator (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @10:11PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Those three little letters (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cluening (6626) on Sunday August 19 2001, @05:48PM (#2195085) Homepage
    Adding GNU to the front of Linux seems to me a lot like adding "FedEx" to the front of "Super Bowl" or something like that. It just seems like somebody wanting to get their name in lights for doing background work. Maybe I'm strange, but when I do background work, I usually enjoy being credited in the background someplace, not out in front of the people who pull things together in the end...
  • What I'd like to know... by denzo (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @05:52PM
  • Hipocricy of Mr. Taco by MSBob (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @05:56PM
  • Stallman.... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Crossfire (15197) on Sunday August 19 2001, @05:59PM (#2195124) Homepage
    I'm pretty sure those of us who have met Stallman in person would agree wholeheartedly.

    Despite the fact the cause has some degree of validity, the extremes which he takes it to regularly stomps on people's toes, and is generally antisocial.

    I had the (mis?)fortune to meet him during one of his visits to Canberra, Australia - which, over lunch, he proceded to argue that our local Linux Users Group (CLUG) should rename itself to the Canberra GNU/Linux Users Group. This did not go down well.

    Even though there are some fairly valid reasons as to why, its still fairly egotistical of him - did he ask for a consensus of all the developers releasing "GNU Software"? Does his own technical work make up a large slice of the GNU works used by linux? [No, Emacs does not count as a large slice, despite its footprint. ;)]

    Just consider RMS as what he really is, a politican.
    • Re:Stallman.... (Score:5, Informative)

      by jorbettis (113413) on Sunday August 19 2001, @06:12PM (#2195164) Homepage

      Well, it's not about stallman's ego, it's about making people realize that there is more to Free Software than the apolitical views of Linus.

      BTW, here's a quote from one of Stallman's speeches (it was very well recieved):

      When I do this, some people think it's because I want my ego to be fed. Of course, it's not like I'm asking you to call it Stallmanix.

      -- Richard Stallman on GNU/Linux


      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Stallman.... by FrostyWheaton (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:38PM
      • Linus didn't name his OS by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @07:43PM
      • Re:Stallman.... by sv0f (Score:3) Sunday August 19 2001, @10:21PM
      • Re:Stallman.... (Score:4, Troll)

        by miguel (7116) on Sunday August 19 2001, @11:44PM (#2196128) Homepage
        Linus did not choose the name `Linux'. Linus chose the name `Freax' and the guy running the funet.fi archive decided that was a horrible name and renamed the kernel for him.

        People gathered around this new operating system that was being written from scratch, and they wrote piles of tools that were missing for this new Linux thing. Many tools came from GNU, yes, but many others were assembled and contributed by many people specifically to make Linux run.

        It is funny how history is rewritten these days. If you ask the people who were around rms on the early days of Linux, you will see that they tell a story from different angles: `Do not work on Linux, work on the Hurd, anything else is a waste of time'. At least this is the story as told by Donald and now Ulrich.
        [ Parent ]
      • Re:Stallman.... by bug1 (Score:1) Monday August 20 2001, @12:43AM
      • Maybe they could compromise (Score:5, Funny)

        by Angelwrath (125723) on Monday August 20 2001, @12:59AM (#2196273)
        If Stallman wants proper credit given to GNU/Linux, and he contributed so much to GNU, I say we combine Stallman and Linux to give both central figures credit to the OS.

        We will now call it "Stallinux".

        D'OH!
        [ Parent ]
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:Stallman.... by krogoth (Score:1) Monday August 20 2001, @02:40AM
      • Re:Stallman.... by Bongo (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @04:56AM
      • Re:Stallman.... by CyberKnet (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @11:23AM
      • Re:Stallman.... by reflective recursion (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @07:59PM
      • Re:Stallman.... by philipm (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @09:57PM
      • Re:Stallman.... by lostguy (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @12:43AM
      • Re:Stallman.... by Glytch (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @11:34AM
      • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Stallman.... by Amon Re (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:13PM
    • Re:Stallman.... by h2odragon (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:46PM
    • Re:Stallman.... (Score:4, Funny)

      by sharkey (16670) on Sunday August 19 2001, @07:15PM (#2195395)
      ...rename itself to the Canberra GNU/Linux Users Group. This did not go down well.

      But then you could call yourselves "C-GLUG", and make beer a staple part of your group.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Stallman.... by MRousseau (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @09:09PM
    • Re:Stallman.... by waveman (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @09:41PM
    • Re:Stallman.... by vu13 (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @09:55PM
    • Re:Stallman.... by djp928 (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @11:05PM
    • Re:Stallman.... by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday August 20 2001, @03:15AM
    • Re:Stallman.... by Rogain (Score:1) Monday August 20 2001, @06:00AM
    • Re:Stallman.... by UnknownSoldier (Score:3) Monday August 20 2001, @08:35AM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Met him but dont agree by barryvoeten (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @09:22AM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Stallman.... by hacksoncode (Score:1) Monday August 20 2001, @11:47AM
    • Re:Stallman.... by Glabrezu (Score:1) Wednesday August 22 2001, @09:54AM
    • Re:At MIT too by mkcmkc (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @09:34PM
    • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • wait a moment by SubtleNuance (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:05PM
  • Names (Score:3, Interesting)

    by _iris (92554) on Sunday August 19 2001, @06:06PM (#2195141) Homepage
    I hope I don't see any README files bitching about "give credit where credit is due" and not calling GNU&Linux (my variant which is a bit more descriptive imo) by a name which gives credit to the GNU developers (not the FSF developers but anyone who releases their code under the GPL).

    On the other hand, does the name of XMMS give credit to the mpg123 developers? There are plenty of projects which repackage other GNU software without giving credit in the name. Does the GNU licensing give enough credit? I really don't think so, but demanding that the name of every project incorporated is not the answer either. Mozilla/XPCom/Bugzilla/Talkback/etc.

    --Drew Vogel
    • Re:Names by the_rev_matt (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @07:35PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • GNU is Not UNIX or Linux. but Linux needs ' GNU ' by Zero__Kelvin (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:10PM
  • why call it GNU/linux by dermond (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:13PM
  • That's FUD by j7953 (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:18PM
    • Re:That's FUD by uchian (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:52PM
      • Re:That's FUD by David Hume (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @08:09PM
    • Re:That's FUD by Phroggy (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:58PM
      • Re:That's FUD by David Hume (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @08:20PM
        • Re:That's FUD by Phroggy (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @08:43PM
          • Re:That's FUD by David Hume (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @10:05PM
      • Re:That's FUD by Arandir (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @09:55PM
    • Re:That's FUD by Zico (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @07:32PM
    • Re:That's FUD by Chester K (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @08:04PM
      • Re:That's FUD by dvdeug (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @10:05PM
      • Re:That's FUD by Chris Johnson (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @10:42PM
    • Re:That's FUD by David Hume (Score:2) Sunday August 19 2001, @08:33PM
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • The Nature of the Beast by pryan (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:19PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Crystal Space by JohnG (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:21PM
    • Re:Crystal Space by SuiteSisterMary (Score:2) Monday August 20 2001, @09:20AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • GNU/linux || Linux thats the question by kuiken (Score:1) Sunday August 19 2001, @06:25PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.